Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: radar101

"The problem here is that the land is now private property. there was a move to deed it to the city, but the Athiest attorney attacked that. "

Backwards, it is on city property, and there was an effort to deed it to a private entity, but that fell apart because of the 2/3rds vote requirement.

If the land was private property, the cross would not be in danger.


15 posted on 07/22/2005 1:05:52 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
If the land was private property, the cross would not be in danger.

That may be true for now, but the ACLU is working on an approach to crosses on private property. Perhaps an eminent domain attack first and then a separation of church and state attack, or something like that....

16 posted on 07/22/2005 1:14:32 PM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson